[R] unexpected behaviour of rnorm()

[Göran Broström]

On Tue, 26 Nov 2002 ripley at stats.ox.ac.uk wrote:

> That's the maximum of 5000 normals, right?  That's pushing the accuracy of
> some internal calculations too hard.
>
> If you want to do this, you should use
>
> RNGkind(, "Inversion")

Just of curiosity, is this a general recommendation? I.e., should I put
that in my .Rprofile and get a generally better RNG? Speed issues?

>
> That's not the default for back-compatibility reasons.

which made me wonder.

Göran


-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
r-help mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html
Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe"
(in the "body", not the subject !)  To: r-help-request at stat.math.ethz.ch
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._